I Remember telling you how when GOD had protected Saint Paul's Cathedral from Two waves of German Bombers, the third wave never turned up in the skies above London due to bad weather over the Channel.

I just wanted to tell you that it isnt the first time GOD has used Weather in the Channel to stop an Enemy of England from Triumph when for all intense and purposes they should advance.

The Other Occurance was 23rd July 1588. In Short, the King of Spain decided to avenge the execution of His Wife, Queen Mary of Scotland, whose claim to the English Throne was that she was Roman Catholic, whilst the reigning Monarch Queen Elizabeth I was Anglican.

Through excellent military strategy, which involved forcing the spanish to break the formation of their armada by sailing kamakazi warships on fire into their midst, and excellently bad weather, which the Spanish Ships couldnt cope with, but the English Ships could, the Armada never even made landfall in England...let alone attempt a full scale land invasion.

The Spanish have never faced such a tremendous defeat at sea, even to this day...and within a decade their Monarch had died in disgrace...and thats when their financial issues concerning bankruptcy began (they are STILL Bankrupt over half a Millenia later )

They should have won with ease. I Believe that GOD himself protected our Nation at that time, just like he did in the 1940s.

Queen Elizabeth I said: My loving people, we have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes for fear of treachery; but, I do assure you, I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear, I have always so behaved myself, that under God I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and goodwill of my subjects; and, therefore, I am come amongst you as you see at this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of battle, to live or die amongst you all – to lay down for my God, and for my kingdoms, and for my people, my honour and my blood even in the dust. I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king – and of a King of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realm; to which, rather than any dishonour should grow by me, I myself will take up arms – I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field. I know already, for your forwardness, you have deserved rewards and crowns, and, we do assure you, on the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean time, my lieutenant general shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble or worthy subject; not doubting but by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and your valour in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over those enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people

I wont bother addressing Nathan since he seems incapable of reading my replies that have already covered his points. As for Huan....Matters of Conscience differ from people to people....YOU might feel bad when you steal or lie...but some people have no problem with rape and murder...therefore its NOT a logical following, that because a majority aggree it becomes a right from GOD

I have no problem with Rights under any Law. My Problem isnt that Guns are protected by US Law...that I dont despute, and never have. My issue is with where Americans believe their law comes from. Many Diss nations like mine for having laws stemming from potentially Tyranical Governments, or monarchies....but somehow a constitution written BY A GOVERNMENT which was their own...well thats exempt because its Rights are from GOD.

You think the British are pompous? At least you dont here us pretending our Rights are Divine...Not many Brits would even say that the Right of Kingship is Devine...I would say it has a basis in scripture...but its not a GOD given Right to have a Monarch...because GOD only gave the Old Testament Law.

Outside of the Old Testament Law, all Laws are relative to their Authority, and as different laws differ under different authorities, no laws can be absolute...therefore, logic dictates that as Rights spring from the Law, so the same applies.

Heaven help us if we took everything the Europeans claims are Human Rights as GOD Given...Would the United States of America, halt the extradition of a Terrorist, because it is a GOD given right for someone to have a family...and he's written down his pooch as his sole dependant? I mean FFS!! THATS what happens when you start down the Human Rights road.

I accept that not all Laws are Just...I personally dont think its Just to hang people just because they are homosexual...but in some countries, by following the law, that is exactly what they do. Its not rocket science what I would do if that rule ever came to England....obviously, I'd run and hide, or leave the country, and from afar I would lobby for change...but I certainly wouldnt deny that the authority of those particular lands have the jurisdiction to make those rules....In England you see in our past what happens when people dont like a law thats made...they try to do something to change the law. If you have a problem with a Monarch...you dont declair that GOD hates all Monarchs...No...You assassinate the Monarch and replace him with one that you like or you aid the attempts of a perfered candidate to overthrow the Government you dont like...thats what Queen Mary was trying to do when she got executed for High Treason...and thats the risk you run...and ironically, for all that some of the loud mouthed americans on this forum go on...the one thing that George Washington is said to have understood completely, is the gravity of what he was doing. He knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was committing High Treason, and he knew very well what would happen if he was unsuccessful in his bid for Freedom.

The total Irony is that George Washington actually had deeply held respect for the Monarchy, for its position, for its power...AND for what it was worth...which is why he was challenging in the first place. He felt mis treated by the institution that should have been supporting him, and he felt the credibility divide was too much for reconcilliation. But what he never advocated was any kind of abolition.

He didnt want to free England from Tyrany...Just the collonial outposts. The Venom with which one of you has spoken against a Reigning Monarch who has given nothing but the most exemplory of service to her subjects, is sickening...and would be sickening to any 1700 American or English. Before Elizabeth is spoken against, perhaps one should look at the American Government....A Federal Government, that has enslaved fifty soverign American States, with a bogus Supreme Court only capable of rulling in favour of its Federal Financial Supply line, a Bi-Partisan Government that play silly beggers whilst their people are stuck in the midst of a recession...and a President, who doesnt even get ellected on the basis of a simple democratic popular vote.

If You ask me...even with your blasted firearms...your more in bondage then I...you just dont know it.